26

There are 17 Sickles in a Galleon, and 29 Knuts in a Sickle. This seems very impractical, as both numbers are primes.

It might be an out-of-universe parody of how old muggle money was divided before it was made decimal, but that old system at least made some sense: the divisions of 12, (or 20) meant that they had a lot of divisors, so you could easily divide it in 2, 3, 4 (or 5) equal parts.

Is there a reason why wizard money is divided in such a way?

Dacio
  • 3,726
  • 1
  • 18
  • 34
vsz
  • 11,794
  • 7
  • 55
  • 95
  • 11
    Sounds like typical "JKR math"... – DVK-on-Ahch-To Apr 02 '13 at 14:18
  • 6
    Those goblins are tricky. – Xantec Apr 02 '13 at 14:20
  • 1
    @DVK - Hey! For some of us, JKR math is all we have to cling to! There's an article on wizarding money at the HP Lexicon, although I'm not sure it exactly answers this question. Apparently, JKR originally meant for 1 Galleon to equal GBP 5.00, but there were a couple of snafus -- it's in the article I link to. – Slytherincess Apr 02 '13 at 14:56
  • 1
    @aSlytherin - by Snafus, do you mean JKR had trouble counting to five quid? – DVK-on-Ahch-To Apr 02 '13 at 16:33
  • Also, am I the only person who was totally incredulous upon reading the following statement from Hagrid: "The gold ones are Galleons. Seventeen silver Sickles to a Galleon and twenty-nine Knuts to a Sickle, it's easy enough." – DVK-on-Ahch-To Apr 02 '13 at 18:21
  • @DVK I don't know, I imagine if that's all you've ever known it would be second nature and therefore quite easy. – Anthony Grist Apr 02 '13 at 18:26
  • @AnthonyGrist - we're talking Hagrid here. Does he strike you ask someone who can easily multiply 17*29 in his head? – DVK-on-Ahch-To Apr 02 '13 at 18:39
  • 2
    By the way, are these three coins universal in the wizard world, or do they use other money outside of Britain/Commonwealth/English speaking world? – vsz Apr 02 '13 at 18:50
  • @vsz That seems like it would make a good question, if it hasn't already been covered. – Anthony Grist Apr 02 '13 at 21:47
  • @DVK - You give Hagrid such a hard time. He's not mentally incompetent. I would describe Hagrid as a simplistic person in general, with a huge heart, who wears his heart on his sleeve. I agree with Anthony Grist that it's probably just second nature for Hagrid and the wizarding world in general, just how we count by 20s in various ways. It would be like any other rote memorization skill, learning your 17s and 29s. :) – Slytherincess Apr 03 '13 at 14:46
  • @vsz - You should ask about whether Galleons, Sickles, and Knuts are international currency or just British currency for wizards. That would be an interesting question. :) – Slytherincess Apr 03 '13 at 14:50
  • Well I could, but as I don't remember anything even remotely resembling foreign currency, I don't think it would be answerable... but well, it's worth a try: http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/33813/are-the-wizard-coins-in-the-harry-potter-books-international – vsz Apr 03 '13 at 16:20
  • Sorry, came here via a link from a suggested duplicate, but that's asking about the origin of the names, rather than the exchange rate. I've found some references to a Knut coin (the Viking, to be specific) but not yet for the other two. Can any of the answerers here come up with anything? Edit: now I can't find the question I was reading. Maybe I'll ask a new one and see ... – Will Crawford Jan 04 '18 at 19:33
  • @DVK-on-Ahch-To I think that's part of the point. The fact that everyone in the wizarding world, not just math geniuses, are so blase about complex math, makes the wizarding world seem more alien and, well, magical. – Acccumulation Jan 06 '18 at 19:58
  • Oh, hey, you can't expect wizards do things the easy way like Muggles do, can you? – WhatRoughBeast Jan 01 '19 at 19:57

2 Answers2

22

The Wizarding coinage system is almost certainly based off (or possibly spoofing) pre-decimalization British coinage.

More specifically, the exact numbers of Galleon/Sickle/Knuts is probably to do with the weirdness relating to the gold Guinea coin in the late 17th century, where the fluctuating value of gold relative to silver resulted in the "1 pound sterling" Guinna coin actually being worth weird (and variable) numbers of shillings and pennies. Presumably, when the International Statute of Wizarding Secrecy came into play in 1692 (the aforementioned late 17th century), they just locked in whatever oddball divisions were current at the time for their own new Wizarding currency and those persisted for the next 300 years, without going through the Recoinage of 1816 or decimalisation in 1972, because Wizards are just a little bit traditional about things.

Compro01
  • 3,662
  • 23
  • 23
19

I think it's for humour, and to exaggerate the "old timey / old fashioned" nature of the magical world. After all, in England, old or old-fashioned people think it makes sense to divide things into 12s or 20s, and not to use the same multiplier for all of them. Old books use even more complicated things like guineas that are strange combinations of other amounts. So the wizarding world, which is even more old fashioned and old timey, would naturally use even weirder numbers and combinations of numbers.

Kate Gregory
  • 889
  • 1
  • 7
  • 20
  • True! When I first started reading Dickens I had to have a handy guide next to me just to figure out all the money denominations. – System Down Apr 02 '13 at 17:15
  • Yes, but dividing into 12, or 20, or 60 at least makes sense, no matter how old-fashioned it looks, and can be quite practical once you get used to it. However, dividing it up in prime numbers is completely different. I would have asked no question if it were divided in, for example, 21s, because it's 3 * 7, both considered "magical" numbers. – vsz Apr 02 '13 at 17:18
  • 6
    Not to mention 2 * 3 * 7, even more magical. – Mr Lister Apr 06 '13 at 10:58